Rule wouldn't require all pets to be leashed

Published: Thursday, October 26, 1995 at 3:15 a.m.

Last Modified: Thursday, October 26, 1995 at 12:00 a.m.

A citizens committee charged with reviewing Spartanburg County's animal control law agreed Wednesday that pets should not have to be leashed if they are under voice control of a handler. The committee, appointed in September, is developing recommendations for the County Council in an attempt to reduce the county's stray animal population and to solve problems with animals running at large. The committee's final recommendations, which may take several months to complete, must be approved by the County Council. "What we are trying to do is have a containment law and not a leash law," said committee member Phil Parillo. County Animal Control Director Jinx Roberts said the handler must have actual control of the animal if it is to be considered under restraint. "If you are walking down the sidewalk and your dog takes off chasing a car or a child on a bicycle, it would no longer be under restraint," he said. If an animal is off of its owner's property and not under control of its owner or a handler, either by voice or leash, it can be picked up by animal control officers and its owner charged with a misdemeanor, according to the recommendation. Dogs and other animals involved in hunting events, obedience trials, conformation shows, tracking tests or lure courses will not be considered "at large," according to the proposed ordinance. The owner of an animal that habitually barks, whines, howls, chases vehicles, runs at large, or damages or defecates on another's property would be in violation of the proposed ordinance. The committee reached no agreement Wednesday on a proposal to charge a countywide pet license fee to pay for stricter enforcement of the animal control law. Committee member Bob Stoner said a license fee is needed to pay for more manpower to enforce a stronger animal control ordinance. However, other members felt it would be difficult to enforce a license fee, because only responsible pet owners would buy a license. Committee member Jimmy Collins said a license fee proposal was the main reason County Council failed to pass a proposed animal control law last year. "The biggest complaint was about registration fees on individuals and kennels," he said. "If we put some type of fee on, you are going to have the same 200 people back in front of County Council." Original Atex file name: 2DOGME.ET1

<p> A citizens committee charged with reviewing Spartanburg County's animal control law agreed Wednesday that pets should not have to be leashed if they are under voice control of a handler. The committee, appointed in September, is developing recommendations for the County Council in an attempt to reduce the county's stray animal population and to solve problems with animals running at large. The committee's final recommendations, which may take several months to complete, must be approved by the County Council. "What we are trying to do is have a containment law and not a leash law," said committee member Phil Parillo. County Animal Control Director Jinx Roberts said the handler must have actual control of the animal if it is to be considered under restraint. "If you are walking down the sidewalk and your dog takes off chasing a car or a child on a bicycle, it would no longer be under restraint," he said. If an animal is off of its owner's property and not under control of its owner or a handler, either by voice or leash, it can be picked up by animal control officers and its owner charged with a misdemeanor, according to the recommendation. Dogs and other animals involved in hunting events, obedience trials, conformation shows, tracking tests or lure courses will not be considered "at large," according to the proposed ordinance. The owner of an animal that habitually barks, whines, howls, chases vehicles, runs at large, or damages or defecates on another's property would be in violation of the proposed ordinance. The committee reached no agreement Wednesday on a proposal to charge a countywide pet license fee to pay for stricter enforcement of the animal control law. Committee member Bob Stoner said a license fee is needed to pay for more manpower to enforce a stronger animal control ordinance. However, other members felt it would be difficult to enforce a license fee, because only responsible pet owners would buy a license. Committee member Jimmy Collins said a license fee proposal was the main reason County Council failed to pass a proposed animal control law last year. "The biggest complaint was about registration fees on individuals and kennels," he said. "If we put some type of fee on, you are going to have the same 200 people back in front of County Council." Original Atex file name: 2DOGME.ET1</p><!-- Nothing to do. The paragraph has already been output -->